By the end of the first day of deliberations in the Drew Peterson murder trial, juror Ron Supalo says there was just a single panelist preventing the group from making a unanimous decision -- him.

"I wanted to sleep on it," he said. "I had to rethink everything I wanted to ask today in my mind and then research it the best I could."

Supalo said he didn't get much sleep, and when he returned to the courthouse Thursday morning he spent the first part of the day reviewing his courtroom notes and discussing with the other jurors the approximately 10 nagging questions he had.

With no physical evidence tying Peterson to the death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, prosecutors had to rely on hearsay and circumstantial evidence. Such testimony isn't usually admissible in court, but Illinois legislators in 2008 passed a law -- dubbed "Drew's Law" -- which allows it in rare circumstances.

Supalo said the jurors took three votes on Wednesday. Seven believed Peterson was guilty on the first vote; eight in the second vote; and 11 in the third.

Ultimately, he said it was the hearsay testimonies by Rev. Neil Schori and attorney Harry Smith that cleared the picture for him.

"Those two were the big ones, just like everybody else," he said. "I couldn't come up with any reason, in my mind, to not put [Peterson] at the scene beyond a reasonable doubt."